Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Texas Governor Greg Abbott calls for nine new amendments to the U.S. Constitution to curb federal tyranny and restore liberty in America


Recommended Posts

Greg-Abbott-US-Constitution.jpg
 
(NaturalNews) Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a rare champion of freedom and liberty, has announced a bold plan to add nine new amendments to the U.S. Constitution. These amendments would protect states' rights and individual liberties while halting the malicious encroachment upon those liberties by a federal government that's increasingly run like a tyrannical police state dictatorship.

Details of the plan are available in this PDF document. It is known so far that the proposed amendments would include:

1) A requirement that the federal government balance its budget and halt debt spending. (Try telling that to Obama, the biggest debt spender in history...)

2) Prohibit Congress from regulating activities that take place wholly within a state. For example, if the state of Texas wanted to declare itself a "health freedom zone" where holistic cancer therapies are legal, the feds could not block such activities. (Same story with legalized marijuana, state gun laws, marriage laws, etc.)

3) Grant states the power to override the U.S. Supreme Court with a two-thirds majority vote. This is designed to reel in the insane corruption of the Supreme Court that we witnessed with decisions on Obamacare in particular (Justice Roberts chose to ignore the meaning of words and the law in rendering his truly insane, demented decision).

4) Require a supermajority of 7 Supreme Court justices to override any law passed by state or federal legislators.

We need a health freedom amendment What's missing from this list that needs to be in the U.S. Constitution? A health freedom amendment that protects the rights of citizens to be free from coercive medical interventions (forced chemotherapy and vaccinations) and to be able to choose the health practitioner of their choice, especially if that person is a holistic, alternative or naturopathic practitioner.

The treatment of cancer patients with pioneering, advanced medicine treatments need to be decriminalized. (Right now, healing cancer patients is a crime in America.) And the licensing monopolies of the state medical boards needs to be shattered.

Furthermore, American citizens need to be protected from being labeled "mentally ill" by doctors and subsequently having their own rights and constitutional protections stripped away from them. Earlier this week, Obama granted doctors the power to call the FBI and place anyone on a "no guy buy" list merely by labeling them mentally ill (based entirely on OPINION, not science).

All sorts of amendments are needed... but beware of Pandora's Box Truth be told, all sorts of new amendments are needed to limit the tyranny of federal government and protect the rights and liberties of individuals. But be careful about opening Pandora's Box...

Insane liberal leftists would also want to add all their own delusional amendments to the Constitution, no doubt asserting that the First and Second Amendments need to be stripped away entirely. The left's war on free speech and gun rights is part of their play for a totalitarian government regime with absolute thought control, speech control and gun control. They despise the fact that Americans still have protections for free speech, and they want to destroy that right for anyone who disagrees with their own warped opinions. So much for "tolerance," huh?

I can see leftists trying to push for constitutional amendments that would eliminate states' rights, destroy individual liberties and demand special protections for felony criminals, rapists, organ harvesting abortionists, illegal aliens and terrorist refugees... all groups that are now supported by the left, of course.

Is this Gov. Abbott's plan for Texas secession? From a practical standpoint, I don't think there's any chance that a constitutional convention will succeed in passing amendments that take away power from the federal regime. My honest assessment is that Gov. Abbott is proposing this knowing it will fail, planning on citing this attempt as a "last ditch resort" before ultimately declaring Texas' secession from the union if things continue to worsen.

What people outside of Texas don't know is that most Texans are ready for Texas to declare itself a new nation. In fact, they wish for it. An independent Texas would be economically strong, militarily dominant and culturally intact. Once Texas secedes, many other states would likely join the effort. The best way to let leftists and liberals learn the lessons of how insanely stupid their ideas are is to let them run states like California into the ground while distancing ourselves from their stupidity. That's also why Northern California is desperately trying to break away from Southern California, by the way.

But moving toward secession is a long, multi-year process that would no doubt be halted if Ted Cruz or Donald Trump were elected next year. There might actually be hope if we can crush the GOP establishment (which is populated by total morons and decrepit zombie politicians), overwhelm the Clinton election machine (run by treasonous criminals and communists) and get an anti-establishment ass-kicker into the White House. (In a follow-up article, I'll reveal how I REALLY feel... ha ha.)

However, if Hillarious Clinton wins the White House, expect Texans to rapidly move in the direction of disconnecting from the insane, corrupt, criminal federal regime that would be run by Hillarious Clinton and her band of violent socialist haters who literally want to imprison or execute anyone who disagrees with the Clintons.

What's my opinion on all this? I'd be thrilled to call Greg Abbott my President. He's a man with principles, vision and real courage. And those qualities are sorely lacking across the political spectrum today.

Learn more:

http://www.naturalnews.com/052567_Greg_Abbott_constitutional_convention_liberty_amendments.html#ixzz3wiqXXKnw

Edited by bigwave
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said on another post - the reason the Feds do not want the Keystone pipeline is not environmental - it's political, as in geo-political.  The last thing they want is Galveston and the Port of Houston to be connected with a pipeline from Canada.  Larger than Iraq, Texas could end up being the USA's newest southern Neighbor...

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, the fed government already is limited by the constitution.

The 10th Amendment.

The bulk of the constitution only creates the framework for the government with the three branches, then determines how the Republic will be represented.

That is why the House is population based, but the higher chamber, the Senate, only has two reps per state, no matter the population.

There are only two jobs given to the government, provide a seamless military defense, because they were worried each State would only patrol around major cities, and rural border areas would be open for armies to land and attack.

The ONLY other job was to be the "disinterested", or third party judge in any disputes between the states.

If say Virginia had a beef with North Carolina over cross state imports, the feds wouldn't care what side won, and so would presumably be fair in their decision.

The 10th Amendment says any task not given to the feds is up to each State.

The feds are the ones that have overstepped the reason they were created.

If we open up a constitutional convention, there's no telling what would result, they would have the authority to throw out the entire thing and install a autocracy.

 

What need to happen is the peoples of every State need to wake the hell up, and take their power back from the States, AND the federal government.

The States have allowed the feds to legislate through purse, they agree to regulate speed limits in exchange for highway funds.

They agree to common core in exchange for education funds.

 

If the people are not going to bother to assert their rights, and by extension the states are going to stay on their knees sucking down fed money, there is no possible extra amendments that will work.

We already have the authority to stop the feds, we just need to stand up and do it.

 

This governor should already know what I said, and already knows the deception. Either that or what he is really saying is, he is demanding to continue to exist on the fake USD that the fed government has allowed their banker friends to create, but instead of living under the rules the feds made for using their money, the governor is now demanding the feds let us play with their money under OUR rules.

 

It wont work.

If we wont stand up the feds now, a couple more laws will not do anything at all.

 

Either we are a country of individual who have united for a single cause, but have retained their individual rights for all other matters, or, we are a collective mob, demanding a teat to keep us safe and happy from cradle to grave.


Like I said on another post - the reason the Feds do not want the Keystone pipeline is not environmental - it's political, as in geo-political.  The last thing they want is Galveston and the Port of Houston to be connected with a pipeline from Canada.  Larger than Iraq, Texas could end up being the USA's newest southern Neighbor...

 

Well, the civil war de3cimated that "right", it would take every state demanding the feds back off.

Otherwise the feds would in fact invade Texas.

 

Umm jmho (yeah right!)
Not sure it is a good idea to mess with the constitution while Obama is any where near Washington!

 Agreed

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Otherwise the feds would in fact invade Texas."

And Arizona and Utah and Idaho and Montana and maybe even your beautiful state.  Possible? Yes but not very probable, besides even the mighty US war machine could not stabilize Iraq in ten years, what makes you think they would be anymore successful in Texas? 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating either action and, I agree with you that the Constitution is sufficient as written.  What I believe the good Texas Governor is doing is to point out to anyone who will listen that the Feral government overreach is egregious to the extent its actions invite this type of consideration.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Otherwise the feds would in fact invade Texas."

And Arizona and Utah and Idaho and Montana and maybe even your beautiful state.  Possible? Yes but not very probable, besides even the mighty US war machine could not stabilize Iraq in ten years, what makes you think they would be anymore successful in Texas? 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating either action and, I agree with you that the Constitution is sufficient as written.  What I believe the good Texas Governor is doing is to point out to anyone who will listen that the Feral government overreach is egregious to the extent its actions invite this type of consideration.  

 

Agree 100%, if a number of States united to confront the out of control feds, it would be a completely different paradigm.

Would be a much more defensible position of all shared borders, but as long as a strong majority of all residents were in agreement, and all fed sympathizers were removed from positions that could cause harm to their cause, the task of oppressive, heavy-handed military suppression would be greatly reduced. At least to start.

But then, the civil was not about slavery, it was about land equity, trade rights, and State rights as a sovereign territory, which each state was initially, and presumably retained the right to secede as part of the agreement.

Lincoln didn't issue the Emancipation Proclamation until 1 1/2 years after the end of the war. Only two northern states would agree to extend full rights to blacks, but since they used it as a recruitment slogan when they were losing, he had to do something.

The proclamation was as much a punishment to the agriculture heavy economy of the south as it was a face saving tool. It didn't "free" blacks, rather it transferred ownership to the federal government.

That way, it allowed the feds to levy and collect a tax for the sweat equity of the labor provided to plantation owners by the fed governments new "property".

When I hear folks talk about how Lincoln "freed" the slaves I cringe.

The democrats responded by creating the KKK, a branch of the Southern Democratic Party, to eliminate the "Radical Republicans", who not only wanted to give blacks full rights, but were also giving land to blacks to start farms, which land ownership was an accepted sign of an individuals "sovereignty".

 

oops.. get carried away...

 

I agree the feds would use every maneuver possible before resorting to violence, but after all the backstabbing, lying, cheating, underhanded, oppressive, and murderous things they have done, I have no doubt they would manufacture an excuse to invade.

Also, I already know there are several in government that would rather see the end of the world than step down or give up control over others.

The biggest problem we have dealing with those types is their perspective is beyond anything we would consider sane.

They have at the least, had knowledge of anti-American events and helped to cover or, had key roles participating in terror events perpetrated against Americans, here and abroad, and I am sure they already have contention plans to deal with future events that everyday working people like us could never even imagine doing to the worst enemy.

 

Think about it, they tricked loyal active duty solders into taking massive amounts of LSD, knowing before they did some would go permanently  insane, just to see what happened "most of the time".

The syphilis, heroin, cancer, malaria, mustard gas,(remember the 7th day Adventists that volunteered for mustard gas experiments rather than go to war?), secret testing of veterans in the VA hospitals as guinea pigs for various random medical tests, the list goes on, and I'm not even starting on all the false flag operations, well known or one that just "didn't work", that involved the death or maiming of innocents humans, in order to create a conflict, in order to influence either ours, or a foreign countries politics.

 

If they were willing to go to war with 1/2 of the states, and to then subject Americans to the deceptions, do you honestly think that after long drawn out negotiations, trade embargo's, infrastructure sabotage, massive drinking reservoir poisoning, military blockades of traffic at borders, arresting, torturing, and other molesting of any activists or their families, and any other actions that I just am not even able to dream up in my morals and ethics limited mind, after however many years of failed negotiations and suicide or drone attacks, I am sure they would most definitely resort to a full frontal attack on any patriots that happened to still be alive.

 

Just the financial hardship would be devastating.

Not only would each state have to decide what kind and form their own government, elect representatives, agree on a trade currency, fund that currency, print and distribute that currency, all while maintaining steady manufacturing, agriculture, and farming, ensure all staples supply and demand is met to serve the public,  determine and legislate their own benefits for the old and infirm, but they would have to get it done in a weekend, or people will starve to death.

 

While I do not get any government supplemental income, I do get my health care from the VA.

What about all the jobless, and those incapable of earning a living.

Until we have at least a few decades of true capitalism, the People will need a substantial social safety net.

As cold as is sounds, all those retired may have to die, those of us about to retire will have to work another few decades to build reservoirs or income investments based on the new currency , so many people have worked their entire lie, paid into a pension as well as social security, only to be cheated of their pensions by a heartless union, corporate merger, or company bankruptcy. How many millions lost their entire life savings in the several manufactured financial meltdowns, from the dot com to housing to savings and loan, to derivatives, to outright fraud schemes, the hits just keep coming.

 

Just trying to get all the high schools rented for a day for the upcoming state caucus',( and we were only getting it done for 1/3rd of the population), took half the night at the last meeting, and we already had several people appointed to the separate tasks, who did the days of research, made the multiple contacts, got the agreement forms, and had everything listed in detailed reports and everything was well within the expected budget.

Even after all that, the final debates were enough to make me want to scream as everything dragged on through the rules of parliament procedure.

 

I can only imagine the face to face contentious debating that went on during the first few continental congress'.

 

My long and drawn out point being, the full spectrum of logistics required to make a break from the federal government is mind boggling, and I honestly don't think 100 people, no matter how alike they are on principal, would be able to agree on such a huge variety of issues in less than a year, and that's only if they really like each other.

 

 

I have wondered a few times if I have enough left in myself to sell out and start all over again.

I would immediately sell my company and move to one of a few select states, fully prepared to join in and fight for freedom.

 

But I would only go if a believed I could build another business wherever I go.

Unless I did not expect to survive the conflict.

 

I would never go expecting to draw an "entitlement" for substance, and for now, my entire financial universe is USD based.

 

 

I am not disagreeing with making a stand, obviously. But I don't know if any less than 2/3 of the States united making a stand would ensure a peaceful transition.

 

That said, all it would take is for enough Americans to wake up tomorrow with a new understanding, see America with new eyes, and we would have a new reality within a week, without one shot fired.

Then, it would only be a short matter of time to lock the doors on the newly emptied buildings, and abandoned three letter agencies that were not constitutionally authorized and no longer wanted.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps in one of these new Amendments they might include a proviso that it is a treasonable offense to to seal ALL records of ANY individual wishing to run for POTUS: further include, this treasonable offense would be punishable with LIFE Sentence in Prison or the Death Penalty for ALL those found guilty of the cover up and attempting to foist an ILLEGAL ALIEN into the POTUS electoral process.

 

It will never happen, but that's whats' needed to dig out the ROT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.